Related Links:Testimony of Michael F. Jacobson, Ph.D.: Before the Senate Committee on Government Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management Hearing on Federal Food Safety Oversight: Does the Fragmented Structure Really Make Sense?

Statement of Michael F. Jacobson, Ph.D., Executive Director, Before the Senate Committee on Government Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management Hearing

My name is Michael Jacobson, and I am the executive director of the Center for Science in the
Public Interest (CSPI). CSPI is an advocacy and education organization focused on food-safety and
nutrition issues. We are supported principally by the 900,000 subscribers to our Nutrition Action Healthletter.

Food-safety experts estimate that contaminated food causes up to 76 million illnesses, 325,000
hospitalizations, and 5,000 deaths each year. Several well-publicized foodborne-illness outbreaks
names after such companies as Jack in the Box, Sizzler, and Sara Lee, have awakened consumers to
the fact that unintentionally contaminated food is a risk that must be reduced.

More recently, the terrorist attack on the U.S. has spurred widespread concern about the
vulnerability of our food supply to intentional contamination-and the ability of our nations food-safety
system to minimize the risks. Those concerns are not unfounded. Last year, a Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention strategic-planning workgroup warned that terrorists might try to contaminate
our food supply using deadly pathogens such as Clostridium botulinum and E. coli O157:H7. A
recent National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report agreed, explaining that biological agents can be
produced relatively quickly and inexpensively and without technical skill. We saw how easily biological
agents could be used for food terrorism when, in 1984, members of a religious commune in Oregon
contaminated ten restaurant salad bars with Salmonella typhimuirum, sickening 751 people.

Bioterrorism is just the latest example of the problem with relying on old laws to regulate new
hazards. Senator Durbins Safe Food Act of 2001 offers a much-needed strategy to correct some of
the deficiencies in our federal food-safety system that have left consumers-and the food industry
itself-vulnerable. Today, for example, just 150 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) inspectors are
responsible for ensuring the safety of four million shipments of imported foods. Not surprisingly, they
inspect less than one percent of those millions of shipments.

Responsibility for food safety is split among 12 federal agencies-from the Department of
Agriculture to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. Balkanization and inflexible restrictions
on applying resources results in many gaps and inconsistencies in government oversight. For example,
the FDA shares with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) the regulation of genetically engineered (GE) plants used for human food, but it
does not approve GE plants or even require a safety review before they are sold to consumers. Nor
does FDA give the public an opportunity to comment on GE foods before they are introduced into the
food supply. The FDA says that, to date, all biotech companies have voluntarily consulted with the
agency before marketing their foods. However, that behind-closed-doors system does little to instill
public confidence in the safety of this powerful and potentially valuable new technology. Although the
FDA has proposed mandatory notification and data submission requirements, CSPI has urged FDA to
both review and actually approve the safety of every genetically engineered crop before it is marketed.
We also are pleased to be working with Senator Durbins staff on legislation to improve FDAs GE
foods program.

A stronger, federal food-safety system is an essential component of a defense against terrorist
attacks on the food supply and also would help to prevent foodborne illnesses due to unintentional
product contamination. CSPI has documented more than 1,600 foodborne-illness outbreaks since
1990 and, of these, foods regulated by the FDA, such as vegetables, eggs, and seafood, account for
almost 80 percent. The FDA has about 770 food inspectors for its 57,000 plants, so, on average, a
single FDA inspector has responsibility for 74 food plants. By contrast, USDA has approximately
7,600 inspection personnel for about 6,500 meat, poultry, and processed-egg plants. That imbalance
between risk and resources led CSPI and other consumer organizations to call on Congress and the
President to develop a single, coherent food-safety statute that is implemented by a single, independent
food-safety agency. Such an agency could allocate its resources according to risk.

Whether the problem is intentional food contamination by bioterrorists or unintentional
contamination by a dirty food plant, our food-safety system is flawed. The challenges are so great, in
fact, that they led Professor John Bailar, the chair of the committee that wrote the NAS report
Ensuring Safe Food from Production to Consumption, to conclude: Our country needs a single
independent food safety agency. . . . When bioterrorism is added to the mix, the case for prompt and
sweeping change becomes compelling.

That is why CSPI strongly supports Senator Durbins Safe Food Act of 2001, which provides a
blueprint of how our food-safety system should be designed. We also would support a parallel-and
equally essential-effort to develop a unified food-safety statute.

Weaknesses in our government programs could set the stage for a crisis in consumer
confidence, a crisis that we would like to see prevented. This is why we support the creation of an
independent food-safety agency with responsibility from farm-to-table. Such an agency must be
strongly oriented to protecting public health as a means of protecting public confidence. So far, other
nations, including the United Kingdom and New Zealand, are ahead of the U.S. in unifying their food-safety activities. It is time that the U.S. joined those leaders.

Thank you for your continuing leadership to improve food safety and for giving me the
opportunity to share CSPIs views on food-safety priorities.